Start a consultation

Support Tree TSAR: Sponsorship Opportunities

Ginkgoales Gorozh.

Suggest a Correction

1. Supertaxonomy Overview

Ginkgoales Gorozh., the ginkgo order, is an ancient order of gymnosperm seed plants represented today by the single family Ginkgoaceae Engl. and the single living species Ginkgo biloba L. Unlike the higher ranks Ginkgoopsida and Ginkgoidae, the order has a substantial internal fossil history. Ginkgoales formerly included multiple lineages with different leaf forms, shoot systems, pollen organs, and ovule-bearing structures, and it was widely distributed through much of the Mesozoic (Zhou 2009; World Flora Online 2026).

The order is characterized broadly by woody growth, open or repeatedly forked leaf venation, and reproductive structures that bear exposed ovules rather than enclosing them within carpels. Many secure members also possessed differentiated long and short shoots. The familiar fan-shaped leaves and highly reduced ovule-bearing stalks of living Ginkgo biloba represent only one surviving expression of a much wider historical range.

World Flora Online recognizes Ginkgoales as containing one living family, Ginkgoaceae. Fossil-inclusive classifications have used additional families or lineages centered on genera such as Karkenia, Yimaia, and Schmeissneria, but their boundaries and ranks vary among authors. Tree TSAR therefore emphasizes well-supported reproductive lineages rather than presenting a single fossil-family list as universally accepted (Zhou 1991, 2009).

Ginkgoales is a major paleobotanical gateway because its history demonstrates the limits of classifying extinct plants from isolated leaves. Similar foliage could occur on plants with substantially different reproductive structures, and several fossils once treated as ginkgoaleans have been reassigned or questioned after more complete organs were discovered (Herrera et al. 2017).

2. Placement in Tree TSAR

The Tree TSAR sequence surrounding Ginkgoales is:

Ginkgoopsida Engl. → Ginkgoidae Engl. → Ginkgoales Gorozh. → Ginkgoaceae Engl. → Ginkgo L. → Ginkgo biloba L.

The immediately broader unit is Ginkgoidae Engl., and the immediately narrower living unit is Ginkgoaceae Engl.

Ginkgoales is the principal Tree TSAR page for:

  • The recognized Mesozoic radiation of ginkgoaleans;
  • Fossil reproductive lineages and proposed fossil families;
  • The distinction between whole plants and fossil organ-genera;
  • Evolutionary changes in ovulate and pollen structures; and
  • The contraction of a widespread order to one living family.

Possible Paleozoic stem relatives and the outer boundary of the lineage are treated under Ginkgophyta. Class-level comparison with cycads and conifers is treated under Ginkgoopsida. Fossil species assigned directly to Ginkgo are treated more fully on the genus page.

World Flora Online places Ginkgoales within Ginkgoidae and lists Ginkgoaceae as its sole included living family. The order was published by Ivan Gorozhankin in 1904 (World Flora Online 2026).

3. Evolutionary History and Fossil Context

The origin of Ginkgoales remains uncertain. Many Paleozoic leaves have been assigned to the order because they are fan-shaped, wedge-shaped, or dichotomously divided, but these features evolved in several extinct seed-plant groups. Zhou (2009) concluded that the evidence supporting most Paleozoic leaf assignments is weak and that no direct fossil ancestor or universally accepted sister group has been identified.

The Permian genus Trichopitys is frequently discussed near the base of ginkgoalean evolution. Its deeply divided vegetative organs and branched ovule-bearing structures are compatible with a relatively stemward position, but its exact relationship to secure Ginkgoales remains debated. Tree TSAR therefore treats it primarily in the broader Ginkgophyta context rather than as an unquestioned member of the order.

The record becomes more secure in the Mesozoic. By the Triassic and Jurassic, ginkgoalean plants displayed a wide range of leaf and reproductive forms. Fossils are known from both hemispheres, and the order became a conspicuous component of many Jurassic and Early Cretaceous floras (Zhou 2009).

Bonacorsi and Leslie (2019) provide a deeper architectural context for this history. Their analysis of euphyllophyte fertile branching compared living Ginkgo biloba pollen cones with much older reproductive systems and showed how compact structures can be understood within repeated evolutionary trends of aggregation and reduction. Their study does not identify Devonian Ginkgoales, but it helps explain why later seed-plant reproductive structures can retain evidence of ancestral branching architecture.

Major reproductive lineages

Zhou (2009) summarized several recurring Mesozoic ginkgoalean lineages. Their exact ranks and memberships remain subject to revision, but they provide a useful guide to order-level diversity.

The Ginkgo–Grenana–Nehvizdyella complex includes plants with reproductive structures interpreted as approaching the lineage that produced the modern genus. Within Ginkgo itself, Jurassic species had comparatively elaborate ovule-bearing systems, while later species show progressive reduction toward the living condition.

The Karkenia lineage bore compact or cylindrical clusters containing numerous ovules or seeds. Species of Karkenia occurred from the Jurassic into the Cretaceous and were associated in several cases with Sphenobaiera-type foliage. A Jurassic species from the Yima Formation preserved important details of the megaspore membrane and strengthened the interpretation of Karkenia as a distinct ginkgoalean reproductive type (Zhou et al. 2002).

The Yimaia–Toretzia complex includes ovulate structures with several comparatively large ovules borne on specialized axes. Yimaia is particularly important because well-preserved material documents morphology, attachment, and age more clearly than many isolated fossil organs (Zhou et al. 2007).

Umaltolepis was historically associated with this broader complex because its narrow Pseudotorellia-type leaves and reproductive organs were interpreted as ginkgoalean. Exceptionally preserved material later showed umbrella-like seed-bearing structures that enclosed several seeds and resembled Peltaspermales and Umkomasiales more closely than secure Ginkgoales. Its removal or reassessment illustrates how whole-plant reconstruction can overturn classifications based mainly on leaves (Herrera et al. 2017).

Schmeissneria is another disputed lineage. Its Jurassic reproductive structures have been interpreted as ginkgoalean by some authors and as possessing angiosperm-like features by others. Wang et al. (2007) argued for a possible connection to early angiosperms, but that interpretation has not displaced the broader controversy over the fossil’s structure and affinity. Tree TSAR treats Schmeissneria as historically associated and unresolved rather than as an uncontested family of Ginkgoales.

Evolution within Ginkgo

The best-documented reduction sequence occurs within the genus Ginkgo. Middle Jurassic Ginkgo yimaensis possessed deeply divided leaves and branched ovulate structures bearing several ovules. Middle Jurassic Ginkgo ginkgoidea from Sweden also preserves ovule-bearing organs associated with diagnostic foliage (Yang et al. 2008).

Lower Cretaceous Ginkgo apodes had a more compact cluster of ovules and was interpreted as bridging part of the structural gap between Jurassic species and the living tree. Ginkgo neimengensis documents another modern-type ovulate structure in the Early Cretaceous (Zhou & Zheng 2003; Zheng & Zhou 2004; Xu et al. 2017).

Pollen cones changed as well. Ginkgo liaoningensis commonly bore three or four microsporangia per sporangiophore, compared with the usual two in living Ginkgo biloba. This supports reduction in the male reproductive system as well as in ovule-bearing structures (Liu et al. 2006).

By the Paleocene, Ginkgo cranei had a modern-type ovulate organ in which ovules were seated directly on collars attached to the peduncle. Cenozoic leaf species such as Ginkgo adiantoides increasingly resembled the living tree, although leaf-based species limits remain difficult to resolve (Royer et al. 2003; Zhou et al. 2012).

These fossils document evolutionary persistence but not a simple ladder. Multiple lineages coexisted, diverged, and became extinct. The living species descends from one surviving branch rather than representing the inevitable endpoint of every Mesozoic ginkgoalean.

4. Classification and Circumscription

Ginkgoales Gorozh. is securely recognized for the living family Ginkgoaceae. Fossil-inclusive circumscription is more complicated because many extinct plants are known from detached organs and because reproductive structures have been interpreted differently over time.

World Flora Online lists only Ginkgoaceae as an included family because its hierarchy is principally organized around living vascular plants. Paleobotanical classifications have recognized additional families or family-level groupings around Karkenia, Yimaia, Schmeissneria, and other reproductive genera. The content and rank of these groups are not standardized sufficiently for Tree TSAR to present a definitive accepted-family table (World Flora Online 2026; Zhou 2009).

Tree TSAR uses the following evidentiary approach:

Secure Ginkgoales include whole plants or associated organs whose reproductive morphology, shoots, leaves, cuticles, and anatomy support ginkgoalean affinity.

Probable Ginkgoales include incomplete plants whose available characters agree strongly with established lineages but lack decisive attachment or anatomical evidence.

Historically associated or disputed taxa include plants assigned to the order mainly through leaf resemblance or contested reproductive interpretations.

This approach avoids two common errors: treating every ginkgo-like leaf as a member of the order and excluding informative fossils merely because their precise family placement remains unresolved.

Ginkgoales is monophyletic in its living circumscription because it contains one surviving family. Fossil monophyly depends on which extinct taxa are included. The reassessment of Umaltolepis demonstrates that historically broad assemblages may not represent one natural group (Herrera et al. 2017).

The order is separate from Cycadales, conifer orders, Gnetales, and flowering plants. Similarities in wood, seeds, divided leaves, or compact reproductive structures do not override whole-organism and phylogenetic evidence.

5. Morphology, Biology, and Identification

Ginkgoaleans were woody seed plants with true secondary growth. Many possessed long shoots that extended the branch system and short shoots that bore clustered leaves and reproductive organs. This architecture is especially familiar in living Ginkgo biloba but also occurs in multiple fossil lineages.

Leaves varied considerably. Common forms included broad fans, wedge-shaped blades, narrow straps, and deeply divided segments. Venation was often open and dichotomous or subparallel. Traditional leaf morphogenera include Ginkgoites, Baiera, Sphenobaiera, and Pseudotorellia.

These names describe fossil organs rather than necessarily complete biological genera. A plant might produce leaves assigned to more than one morphogenus, and similar foliage could occur in unrelated or only distantly related seed plants. Cuticular characters—such as stomatal arrangement, subsidiary cells, epidermal form, and cuticle ultrastructure—often provide stronger evidence than gross shape alone.

Ovulate structures ranged from branched systems bearing numerous ovules to compact clusters and highly reduced stalks. Ovules were exposed rather than enclosed within a carpel. Collars or cup-like structures occurred at the ovule base in several lineages, but their morphology and developmental interpretation varied.

Pollen organs were generally axial structures bearing multiple microsporangia. Fossil species show variation in the number of sporangia per sporangiophore and in cone compactness.

Living Ginkgo biloba retains motile sperm, prolonged pollen-tube development, and archegonia. These features are important to understanding the surviving order but cannot be observed directly in most fossils.

Secure identification of fossil Ginkgoales therefore relies on combinations of:

  • Reproductive morphology;
  • Attached or repeatedly associated foliage;
  • Long- and short-shoot organization;
  • Cuticular anatomy;
  • Wood and vascular structure;
  • Pollen morphology; and
  • Stratigraphic and geographic context.

6. Distribution and Ecology

Ginkgoales achieved a nearly worldwide Mesozoic distribution. Fossils occur across Eurasia, North America, South America, Antarctica, and other former land areas. Their ranges shifted as continents moved and climates changed (Zhou 2009).

The order occupied varied environments, including temperate forests, river valleys, floodplains, lake margins, and seasonally disturbed habitats. Some later Ginkgo species appear to have favored riparian or disturbance-prone settings, but the ecological diversity of the entire order was broader.

Ginkgoaleans declined through the later Cretaceous and Cenozoic. No single mechanism adequately explains the contraction. Climate change, geographic fragmentation, altered disturbance regimes, habitat loss, reproductive limitations, and changing plant communities probably affected different lineages at different times.

The sole living species is native to China and has been spread globally through cultivation. Its modern horticultural distribution should not be confused with the natural distribution of the order.

7. Human Uses and Cultural Importance

All living uses of Ginkgoales derive from Ginkgo biloba. The tree is cultivated as an ornamental and urban tree; its prepared seeds are used as food; and its leaves supply commercial extracts.

The order has exceptional scientific and educational value. Fossils of Ginkgoales are used to study seed-plant evolution, reproductive reduction, whole-plant reconstruction, paleoclimate, plant–insect interactions, and extinction. The order also provides one of the clearest examples of how a once-diverse lineage can be reduced to a single living species.

Ginkgo leaves are familiar symbols of deep time and evolutionary persistence, but fossil research demonstrates that the order contained much more than trees identical to the modern species.

8. Conservation Significance

The living conservation significance of Ginkgoales is concentrated in Ginkgo biloba, an Endangered species that is nevertheless widely cultivated. Its extinction would eliminate the final living order-level branch (Forest et al. 2018; Plants of the World Online 2026).

Conservation requires protection of genetically differentiated populations, provenance-based ex situ collections, both reproductive sexes, and natural regeneration. Detailed population evidence is treated under the species account.

The fossil record has a complementary conservation value. Rare localities preserving attached reproductive organs, cuticles, seedlings, or whole-plant associations can resolve relationships that isolated leaves cannot. Destruction of these sites permanently removes evidence of the order’s extinct diversity.

9. Major Included Groups

Ginkgoaceae Engl.

The only living family. It contains Ginkgo biloba and the modern diagnostic character combination.

The Ginkgo–Grenana–Nehvizdyella complex

A broad evolutionary grouping centered on reproductive structures approaching the lineage of modern Ginkgo. Boundaries and ranks vary among paleobotanical treatments.

The Karkenia lineage

Characterized by ovulate structures bearing numerous seeds or ovules in compact or cylindrical arrangements. Associated foliage often resembles Sphenobaiera.

The Yimaia–Toretzia lineage

Includes reproductive structures with several relatively large ovules on specialized axes. Yimaia is among the best-documented Mesozoic ginkgoalean reproductive genera.

Schmeissneria

A disputed Jurassic lineage historically linked with Ginkgoales but also interpreted as angiosperm-like. Its placement remains unresolved.

Historically associated Umaltolepis–Pseudotorellia plants

Once widely treated as ginkgophytes, but better-preserved seed-bearing organs support closer comparison with peltasperms and corystosperms.

10. Similar, Overlapping, or Historically Confused Groups

Ginkgophyta Bessey

The broader division, including uncertain stem relatives and the outer evolutionary context.

Ginkgoaceae Engl.

The sole living family and only a small surviving part of the order’s former diversity.

Czekanowskiales or Leptostrobales

Mesozoic seed plants with narrow leaves and short shoots. They share some vegetative similarities with ginkgoaleans but have distinctive reproductive structures.

Peltaspermales and Umkomasiales

Extinct seed-plant orders relevant to the reassessment of Umaltolepis. Similarities in seed-bearing structures do not make them accepted Ginkgoales.

Caytoniales

An extinct lineage with partially enclosed ovules, historically linked with ginkgoaleans in some broad evolutionary hypotheses.

Dicranophyllales

Paleozoic seed plants with forked leaves. Foliage resemblance alone does not establish ginkgoalean affinity.

Conifers

Ginkgoales are woody gymnosperms but not conifers. The orders differ in phylogenetic position, foliage, reproductive morphology, and sperm biology.

Fossil leaf morphogenera

Ginkgoites, Baiera, Sphenobaiera, and Pseudotorellia are not automatically equivalent to biological genera or secure order membership.

11. Additional Information

12. References and Further Reading

Bonacorsi NK, Leslie AB (2019) Sporangium position, branching architecture, and the evolution of reproductive morphology in Devonian plants. International Journal of Plant Sciences 180(6): 493–503. https://doi.org/10.1086/702938

Forest F, Moat J, Baloch E, Brummitt NA, Bachman SP, Ickert-Bond S, Hollingsworth PM, Liston A, Little DP, Mathews S, et al. (2018) Gymnosperms on the EDGE. Scientific Reports 8: 6053. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-24365-4

Herrera F, Shi G, Ichinnorov N, Takahashi M, Bugdaeva EV, Herendeen PS, Crane PR (2017) The presumed ginkgophyte Umaltolepis has seed-bearing structures resembling those of Peltaspermales and Umkomasiales. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 114(12): E2385–E2391. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1621409114

Liu XQ, Li CS, Wang YF (2006) The pollen cones of Ginkgo from the Early Cretaceous of China, and their bearing on the evolutionary significance. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 152(2): 133–144. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8339.2006.00547.x

Plants of the World Online (2026) Ginkgo biloba L. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. https://powo.science.kew.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:262125-1

Royer DL, Hickey LJ, Wing SL (2003) Ecological conservatism in the “living fossil” Ginkgo. Paleobiology 29(1): 84–104. https://doi.org/10.1666/0094-8373(2003)029%3C0084:ECITLF%3E2.0.CO;2

Wang X, Duan S, Geng B, Cui J, Yang Y (2007) Schmeissneria: A missing link to angiosperms? BMC Evolutionary Biology 7: 14. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-7-14

World Flora Online (2026) Ginkgoales Gorozh. World Flora Online Consortium. https://www.worldfloraonline.org/taxon/wfo-9000000227

Xu XH, Yang LY, Sun BN, Wang YD, Chen P (2017) A new Early Cretaceous Ginkgo ovulate organ with associated leaves from Inner Mongolia, China and its evolutionary significance. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 244: 163–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.revpalbo.2017.05.007

Yang XJ, Friis EM, Zhou ZY (2008) Ovule-bearing organs of Ginkgo ginkgoidea (Tralau) comb. nov., and associated leaves from the Middle Jurassic of Scania, South Sweden. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 149(1–2): 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.revpalbo.2007.09.005

Zheng SL, Zhou ZY (2004) A new Mesozoic Ginkgo from western Liaoning, China and its evolutionary significance. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 131(1–2): 91–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.revpalbo.2004.03.002

Zhou ZY (1991) Phylogeny and evolutionary trends of Mesozoic ginkgoaleans: A preliminary assessment. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 68(3–4): 203–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/0034-6667(91)90024-W

Zhou ZY (2009) An overview of fossil Ginkgoales. Palaeoworld 18(1): 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palwor.2009.01.001

Zhou ZY, Zhang B, Wang YD, Guignard G (2002) A new Karkenia (Ginkgoales) from the Jurassic Yima Formation, Henan, China and its megaspore membrane ultrastructure. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 120(1–2): 91–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0034-6667(01)00146-4

Zhou ZY, Quan C, Liu YS (2012) Tertiary Ginkgo ovulate organs with associated leaves from North Dakota, U.S.A., and their evolutionary significance. International Journal of Plant Sciences 173(1): 67–80. https://doi.org/10.1086/662651

Zhou ZY, Zheng SL (2003) Palaeobiology: The missing link in Ginkgo evolution. Nature 423(6942): 821–822. https://doi.org/10.1038/423821a

Zhou ZY, Zheng SL, Zhang LJ (2007) Morphology and age of Yimaia (Ginkgoales) from Daohugou Village, Ningcheng, Inner Mongolia, China. Cretaceous Research 28(2): 348–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cretres.2006.05.004